IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 28, 2012
DANIEL THOMAS HARVEY, PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE; DOUGLAS COUNTY; EL DORADO COUNTY; ROBERT K. PRISCARO; JAKE HERMINGHAUS; SHANNON LANEY; ANDREW EISSINGER, DEFENDANTS.
This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 14, 2012, the court ordered plaintiff to show cause why plaintiff should not be sanctioned for failing to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants County of El Dorado and Robert K. Priscaro's motion to dismiss,*fn1 Dckt. No. 19, and continued the hearing on that motion to dismiss to July 17, 2012. Dckt. No. 24.
On June 22, 2012, plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause. Dckt. No. 26. Therein, plaintiff states that he did not receive notice from the court or from the defendants informing him that the motion to dismiss had been re-noticed for hearing. Id. at 2, 3. In light of that representation, the June 14, 2012 order to show cause is discharged.
Although plaintiff may not have initially received defendants' May 8, 2012 notice that the motion to dismiss was re-set for hearing, because plaintiff was notified of the July 17, 2012 hearing date in the June 14, 2012 order to show cause, the July 17, 2012 hearing date will remain on calendar at this time. In accordance with Local Rule 230, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion on or before July 3, 2012,*fn2 and defendants shall file a reply thereto on or before July 10, 2012.